The tomcat from Styria has now even occupied the Supreme Court in Vienna: the wife had secretly taken the pet with her when she moved out of the apartment. A dispute then ensued in court.
The first court assigned the animal to the husband and justified this as follows: The man had done “educational work” with the initially “socially conspicuous” tomcat and played with him. The woman who fed the animal fought this verdict – with success. The court of appeal reversed the decision. In the process, it should be clarified “to which of the two owners the cat has a stronger emotional bond,” it said. The man appealed against this verdict, which is why “Felix” was now an issue at the Supreme Court (OGH). In his judgement, he agreed with the master.
In its legal justification, the OGH states: “Pets are to be treated as one thing for post-marital division.” According to the Supreme Court, contrary to the court of appeal, it does not matter which spouse the animal has a closer relationship with.
Animal rights activists protest
This calls animal rights activists into action: “As is well known, an animal is no longer a matter under civil law,” says Madeleine Petrovic from Tierschutz Austria. “Animal protection enjoys such a high status in today’s society that the simple legislator cannot avoid committing to ethical animal protection. It is therefore not only logical, but imperative that this development of modern animal protection law also be reflected at the highest level manifested in the legal system and supported and secured by it., according to the animal rights activist.
Animal protection has had constitutional status as a state goal since 2013. Such a reasoning for the judgment would be contrary to this, Petrovic explains.
Source: Nachrichten
